Big Data Needs Government Data

WASHINGTON (DTN) -- The plans of John Deere, Monsanto and other companies to offer "prescription farming" services for individual farmers will depend on continued federal information gathering and statistical analysis, a series of experts said Tuesday.

Organizers held a briefing on Capitol Hill looking at the issues surrounding "Increasing U.S. Agriculture's Competitive Edge: How Do Public Data and Big Data Fit?"

Much has been made of the ability of companies to collect an unprecedented amount of data on a farmer's operations through modern technology. Still, the companies' ability to make that individual farmer's data meaningful "will depend on the statistics we have from the public sector," said John Deere Chief Economist J.B. Penn, a former USDA undersecretary for farm and foreign agricultural services in the George W. Bush administration.

"Every time a pass is made across the field you get new information that can be used in decision making," Penn said, although he noted that individual data needs to be combined with the kind of data collected by the government to develop the prescription.

Mary Bohman, the administrator of USDA's Economic Research Service, noted that ERS has a long history of collecting "quality, complex, credible information" and is "very efficient" in its data collection processes.

Mark Harris, the chair of the Agricultural Statistics Board of the USDA's National Agricultural Statistics Service, noted that collecting the data across the nation's 3,000 counties "is a little more challenging than some people realize."

He also noted that NASS data cannot be subject to a Freedom of Information Act request and that farmers trust NASS and provide it with the data it needs for USDA's numerous reports.

The event, sponsored by the nonprofit Council on Food, Agricultural and Resource Economics (C-FARE), seemed designed to convince congressional staff to keep up the budget for USDA statistical research. But the panel also discussed some of the controversies surrounding big data.

Penn, the keynote speaker, said there are issues surrounding prescription farming and data collection that "need to be settled," and American Farm Bureau Federation Chief Economist Bob Young said he believes the prescription farming business is so new and developing so fast that it may be different in 2015 compared to 2014.

Young said the big issue is "data ownership" and a farmer's ability to get information back. Companies say "one thing" in their statement of principles and another in the contracts that they ask farmers to sign. Young said farmers wonder if information turned over to a private company could end up in the hands of a federal agency and be subject to a Freedom of Information Act request.

"USDA has a tremendous role to play as the referee," Young said.

Farm Bureau has expressed concerns that companies or individuals may make use of a farmer's data on field operations and expenses. The Climate Corporation, which Monsanto recently bought, has promised that farmers can reclaim their data.

The big issue for farmers is a fear the data on such items as how much nitrogen was applied to a field and how much water was used will end up in the hands of federal regulators, said Ted Crosbie, a distinguished science fellow at Monsanto Co.

"That is the hottest subject in any grower meeting you will have on this subject," Crosbie said.

It is unclear, he added, whether the federal government could force a company to give the Environmental Protection Agency data on a farm with a "georeference" tag on it. Georeferencing -- collecting data down to the square foot -- is the only way to make prescription farming advice work, Crosbie noted.

The technical ability to collect the data is another challenge, he said, because so many areas of rural America have poor Internet and cell phone service.

The existence of the data on an individual farm raises issues between landlords and tenants, Crosbie noted. The tenant is likely to buy the prescription farming service, but Crosbie said he recently rewrote a lease so the landowner would also have access to the information because it would affect the value of the land.

Barry Goodwin, a North Carolina State University professor, noted that prescription farming raises so many legal, ethical and contractual issues that the industry will be racing to keep up with its development.

"There is value to the farmer, there is value to the technology companies," Goodwin noted.

Questions also arose about whether the data collected by the companies would be valuable to the government.

Kitty Smith, a former ERS administrator, said the government could benefit from a deeper knowledge of the soil management practices that the companies would develop.

Asked whether Monsanto, John Deere and other companies would compete on the basis of the content of their prescriptions or on price, Penn said he didn't know and "if I knew I wouldn't reveal it here today."

Prescription farming, Penn said, "is uncharted territory. A lot of bets are being made. It is not going to be long before we know."

Crosbie said Penn "covered it pretty well" and declined to comment further on Monsanto's business strategy.

(GH/CC/CZ)

Copyright 2014 DTN/The Progressive Farmer. All rights reserved.